Who is better: Roberson or Barnes?

Anthony Roberson gives Don Nelson nothing but good minutes when he plays. So someone please explain to me why he sits the bench the whole game. In my mind, he is better than barnes. HE is arguably our best shooter and is definitely a 3-pt threat.

Roberson gives extremely spotty results when he plays. That's why there's a lack of consistency in the minutes; because there's a lack of consistency with his play.

Typical example: December 4th, Roberson went 9/16 (56%) against the Spurs. The next night, he went 2/9 (22%) against the Rockets.

Yesterday, he went 0-for-3 against the Heat. The game before that, he went 1-for-5 against the Craptors. A week before that, he went 1-for-4 against the Sonics. And none of these teams (not even the Heat, mind you) have good perimeter defense.

Combine that with the fact that all he brings to the table is outside shooting (which is situational to begin with)... and you have your answer.

Matt Barnes is leagues better than him. So far, Barnes' shooting has outranked Roberson's... and the fact that Barnes can do a little bit of everything well means he has a major advantage on Roberson, whose purely one-dimensional.

In a game where the team is struggling, like yesterday, he should be brought in for a few minutes and given 3 to 5 shots to see if he can do something. If he is missing, he should be put right back on the bench

I don't like Roberson at all. He knows he has a reputation as a gunner, so when he gets a few minutes in a game, he always feels like he needs to prove himself, so he chucks up the first three point look he gets. And he can't even make threes! He may have been a good shooter and in college and the preseason, but let me check real quick what his % is for this season, I'm guessing it's horrible.

Allright, at .382 it's not as bad as I expected. But for a guy who is supposedly 'lights out', he seems to miss too many open shots, and take too many contested ones, too.

Barnes also adds a whole other dimension to our defense in his shot-blocking. Having two threats down there (him and Biedrins) forces players fighting to the hole to be careful. I've seen lots of times where a player was careful in the post around Barnes and Biedrins leaps out for a nasty swat.

Barnes is a whole different player than Roberson. I only see Ant as one of those players to spark the Warriors offense off the bench with his shooting. But he is too inconsistent, does not handle the ball well, and tends to make mistakes on his passes. You might say Monta is the same, but he plays with intensity and is fearless. He can score and can keep up with the NBA's fastest defensively. Roberson will, and always will be(that's unless he somehow becomes a star) a product off the bench who will help the offense when it is in trouble. And the good thing about Barnes is that Nellie doesn't have to play Mike 30-40 minutes.

John Patrick wrote:Barnes also adds a whole other dimension to our defense in his shot-blocking. Having two threats down there (him and Biedrins) forces players fighting to the hole to be careful. I've seen lots of times where a player was careful in the post around Barnes and Biedrins leaps out for a nasty swat.

i love how you bring defense into the mix, considering the warriors are in the bottom five in the league in points given up. you are a truly brilliant man to throw that in there. please, try me again when you know what your talking about

It is true indeed, that the Ws have a poor defense. However, the only players on their team who consistently play any defense are Biedrins, Pietrus and Barnes (and Foyle in his utterly inelegant way), so not playing Barnes would only hurt their defense even more. I love it when guys like Barnes come along, unsung worker bees who contribute far more than the hype or draft pick would indicate.